Functioning Empires

>>2133923
Have an infallible AI run it
Really though they do "work" in the sense that they, by your own admission, last a long time. No one can possibly see the small shit snowballing over generations that undo empires. Otherwise they wouldn't have let it happen

File: Bingley2.jpg (81KB, 350x232px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 350x232px

>>2133923

This is an easy material question with an easy material answer: Infrastructure.

Things like aqueducts, sewage systems, roads, canals, railroads, telegraphs, power grids and the Internet bind people together into one entity. A well built system will stand the test of time and will go a long way in making shared interests obvious, while making divisions more trivial. It expedites commerce, making things like chain stores plausible which help replace local cultures with a national one. Even better, in the event a conflict does happen it becomes easier for a military to move.

It's most obvious on the local level. Cities with the least divisions (comparatively speaking) are places like NYC which features a citywide subway connected to three feeder networks (NJT, NHRR, LIRR). Same for Chicago with the El, Metra and South Shore line. Hence why both have a unique, uniform culture across those cities. For comparison, Los Angeles still does not have much of a citywide transit network and the divisions are more obvious; someone from Weho will have a very different outlook than someone from Palmdale or Compton. They don't share the same spaces when they commute, they have individual private compartments (their cars) on clogged freeways.

Nationally, it's why things like the railroad land grants and TVA happened. This was so that American culture could be extended into the southwest and south, where it previously was not. Hence why Atlanta and Austin are full of faggots while Mobile and Tallahassee do not.

File: SAR_Class_7E_E7008_BT.jpg (36KB, 443x255px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 443x255px

>>2134000

Anyway, as it pertains to your specific question:

Infrastructure makes logistics much easier and thus creates greater room for error. A country with an amazing infrastructure can have a totally incompetent leader but won't crash and burn since people's lives will be less directly affected.

For a specific example, compare South Africa Transnet to the National Railways of Zimbabwe. TN's system is mostly electrified, which has proved to be a very good thing as it can run off coal and has low maintence costs. NRZ's system is not, and due to the country's economic problems they can no longer afford fuel. Trains then don't operate, then businesses relying on them cannot reliably ship or receive goods. Traffic piles up in the cities, causing roads to deteriorate, which affects emergency services. Meanwhile the diesel engines inside the locomotives rust away.

File: 1482600135340.jpg (8KB, 236x236px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 236x236px

>>2133923
THAT IS NOT A PAINTING OF ROME

>>2133923
>various reasons
Perhaps you should list some examples.